Democrats have gained complete control of key battleground states, potentially paving the way for a shift from the Electoral College to a national popular vote system for future presidential elections.
In a significant shift following the recent midterm elections, Democrats have secured full control of the governor’s mansions and both legislative chambers in five pivotal battleground states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Arizona. This political landscape raises the possibility that the Electoral College, a traditional mechanism for electing U.S. presidents, could be fundamentally altered in the near future.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is already in motion, with 18 states and Washington, D.C., having formally committed to awarding their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote, regardless of their performance within individual states. Currently, the jurisdictions participating in the compact account for 222 electoral votes, falling short of the 270 needed to activate the agreement. However, the inclusion of Pennsylvania’s 19 electoral votes, Michigan’s 15, Arizona’s 11, Wisconsin’s 10, and Nevada’s 6 would elevate the total to 283, assuming all join and withstand potential legal challenges.
As the political dust settles from the midterms, attention is shifting towards the potential implications of these Democratic gains. The prospect that key states might align to guarantee that the winner of the national popular vote in the 2028 presidential election also secures the presidency has gained traction among lawmakers. “The time is right,” remarked Carrie Rheingans, a Democratic representative from Michigan, in an interview with the New York Times. “This blue tsunami is really going to help push this forward across the whole nation.” Wisconsin state lawmaker Kelda Roys echoed this sentiment, stating that national popular vote legislation would be a priority in the upcoming session.
Understanding the Current Electoral College System
The Electoral College is an indirect system used to determine the outcome of U.S. presidential elections. Under this framework, the presidency is not solely decided by the total number of popular votes cast nationwide but rather by the accumulation of electoral votes awarded on a state-by-state basis. With few exceptions, the candidate who garners the most votes in each state on Election Day receives all of that state’s electoral votes, which correspond to its representation in Congress.
This winner-takes-all approach has led candidates to focus their campaigns primarily on swing states—those that could feasibly support either major party—while largely neglecting states with predictable voting patterns. The Electoral College was conceived as a compromise by the Founding Fathers, who debated whether the president should be elected directly by the populace or chosen by Congress. Over time, individual states adopted their own winner-take-all laws, though the Constitution provides them the authority to determine how electors are selected.
Potential Impact of the National Popular Vote Compact
The idea of a national popular vote compact gained momentum in the early 21st century, especially after controversial elections where the popular vote did not align with the Electoral College outcome. Notably, George W. Bush’s 2000 victory despite losing the popular vote and Donald Trump’s 2016 win, where he lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, intensified discussions around electoral reform.
Introduced in 2006 by John Koza, a computer scientist and former Democratic elector, the NPVIC seeks to ensure that the candidate who wins the most popular votes nationwide is guaranteed enough electoral votes to win the presidency without necessitating a constitutional amendment. The compact requires the agreement of states with a combined total of at least 270 electoral votes to take effect, fundamentally changing how candidates campaign and govern. Advocates argue that it would incentivize candidates to appeal to a broader electorate rather than focusing solely on swing states.
Maryland was the first state to join the compact in 2007, followed by ten others before the 2016 election. An additional eight states joined after Trump’s election, with some Republican-led jurisdictions also supporting the compact in their states, albeit more frequently when Democrats hold full legislative control.
Looking Ahead: Challenges and Considerations
As attention turns to legislative sessions in the new Democratic trifecta states, lawmakers are reportedly discussing the introduction of legislation to join the NPVIC ahead of the 2028 elections. However, challenges remain. For instance, Michigan struggled to enact the compact during its previous Democratic trifecta, and Nevada previously failed to pass it amid concerns over diminished influence in presidential elections.
Virginia’s recent addition to the compact, following a Democratic trifecta, sparked criticism from Republican lawmakers, who labeled it an “unconstitutional assault on our democracy.” Concerns about potential legal challenges also loom large, particularly regarding whether the compact could be implemented without congressional approval, as suggested by legal experts.
Ultimately, the question remains whether the national popular vote will be prioritized by lawmakers amid pressing issues such as cost of living and economic concerns. As Wisconsin state assemblyman Clinton Anderson pointed out, while he aims to make it a priority, it may not resonate with constituents who are focused on immediate economic concerns. The evolving political landscape suggests that the future of the Electoral College and the NPVIC will continue to be subjects of intense debate as the 2028 election approaches.
